Mica: No immigrant 'amnesty': Front & Center

John Mica

April 1, 2014

Republican John Mica of Winter Park is a familiar figure in Central Florida and in Washington, D.C.; he's now serving his 11th term in the U.S. House. As the former chairman of the House Transportation Committee, he oversaw billions of dollars in federal spending. Now he heads the House Government Operations Subcommittee, where he says he's focused on cutting government waste. In a recent, wide-ranging interview with the Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board, Mica touched on multiple topics, including immigration policy, the Affordable Care Act, and the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Fight 370. Excerpts follow.

Q: The immigration reform bill that the Senate passed last year includes a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. What's your view on that provision?

A: I have a very firm no-amnesty policy, and it's based on my personal convictions, my personal experience. All of my grandparents were immigrants. They all came legally. They all did the process. I have family, too, most recently Mexican-Americans, who have come here legally. And I've checked back with my family members. Everybody supports my position. …

Q: What about other measures in the bill that would increase the number of visas for immigrants?

A: All the other stuff I can support. I have no problem expanding legal immigration. I have no problem expanding some of the types of visas.

Q: Republicans in Florida seem to be split on what to do about the undocumented immigrants who were brought here as children. What about you?

A: I do have questions about how to handle the innocent victims. …These people were not consciously violating the law. They were victims of the circumstances.

Q: The House just voted recently for the 50th time to repeal Obamacare. Isn't this just a pointless political exercise?

A: Well, all of them weren't repeal votes. Many of them have been to change the law, which obviously is flawed. The president some 20 times now has waved his magic wand and changed the law. We're trying to do it through the legitimate process of actually passing amendments to the law.

Q: What's your main gripe with the law?

A: I think it's kind of sad when we pass a program that has created a bureaucracy which has thousands of positions, huge amounts of cost, [and] we've signed up a minimal amount of people. … I don't think we've achieved what we set out to do — it was to bring the costs down for folks. … Now [the Obama administration] expects the premiums to go up next year, because the people they expected didn't enroll.

Q: So what would you do to expand health coverage?

A: Unlike some Republicans, I would probably support the expansion of Medicaid, an existing program. I know that's been rejected by some in my party. But you can take some existing programs, modify them, and provide better care with less cost. But you need some true competition, you need to go in and face the liability and tort question that drives everyone's costs up. The reason why people aren't signing up for it is it's costly.

I'm on Obamacare — I was forced on to it. I'm paying more, and my deductibles are three times as much. So I'm paying more and getting less.

Q: As a former Aviation Subcommittee chairman, do you have any thoughts on Malaysia Flight 370?

A: All the reports we got on [the plane's location] were radar … If we have in place a global network of satellites, the next generation of air-traffic control, then we'll know where planes are around the world. …

The United States should be ahead of that game … We've got some next-generation air-traffic-control work being done at Daytona Beach. Every plane would have a transponder on all the time. You would know where it is or be able to track it through various means. That would be a big [advantage] in these kinds of cases.